Krzysztof Trzcinski, 'Citizenship in Europe: The History of the Idea and Institution.' This is an interdisciplinary book that is mostly political, historical and juridical in character, as the concept of citizenship is one of the key terms of the social sciences, and raises questions of a legal, political, historical, philosophical and sociological nature. The main subjects of this work are the origins and evolution of the idea and institution of citizenship in Western Europe. Doctrinal and normative models of citizenship presented (...) in this monograph are of different historical origins (beginning with ancient times and ending with the 20th century). This work shows that in different historical periods, the concept of citizenship underwent shifts in semantic substance and that the idea of citizenship is in permanent flux. Hence, the essence of citizenship is continually being enriched with new elements (or, at times, impoverished by the loss of other elements). The concept of citizenship has been redefined in the historical perspective according to specific conditions of a socio-political, economic, and cultural nature. At various historical periods, the term 'citizen' referred to a broader or narrower spectrum of society. Criteria for membership in the body of citizens also evolved. Over the centuries, many models of citizenship emerged in Europe. Some of them were institutional in form (the Roman model, for example), whereas others were the fruit of the social and political thinking of political philosophers at different times (such as Jean Bodin). The basic models emerged in ancient Athens and Rome. Later models of citizenship usually took over a considerable number of traits particular to initial models (such as the right to life), but at the same time, they usually eliminated some of their elements (such as the enslavement of certain members of society) while simultaneously creating and adding new ones (such as electoral rights for women). In this manner, models emerged, which were an offshoot of classical models. These models contributed in part to the formation of the contemporary institution of citizenship, which brings together different elements of various historical models. This book is a contribution to research into the evolution of the state (including research into the formation of the nation-state in Europe), as the institution of citizenship is inherently and functionally tied to the state. This work also contributes to research into the evolution of a new model of citizenship, namely the supranational European Union citizenship. The institutional development of the idea of EU citizenship could - along with the unavoidable transformation of all community structures or even the very idea of integration itself - lead to a fundamental change in the contemporary concept of state citizenship. This work could also prove useful in research into the phenomenon of immigration in Europe, especially into the interdependence between the question of obtaining the citizenship of the host state and the effective integration of immigrants. (shrink)

In Rites of Privacy and the Privacy Trade Neill constructs an original theory of natural rights and human dignity to ground our right to privacy, arguing that privacy and autonomy are innate natural properties metaphorically represented on the moral level and socially bestowed. She develops her position by drawing on works in history, sociology, metaphor, law, and the moral psychology of Lawrence Kohlberg. The resulting theory provides surprising answers to controversial and pressing questions regarding, for instance, our right to privacy (...) for medical records in various contexts and in relation to various authority structures, including government. Neill demonstrates that, while we have some entitlement to protection of privacy, entitlement does not have the moral scope suggested by currently entrenched legal and social norms. She cautions against some of the privacy privileges we currently enjoy - referring specifically to claims such as those against insurance companies to prevent access to medical records - and suggests that if they are to be continued, respect for privacy is not the reason. (shrink)

In contemporary bioethics, the autonomy of the patient has assumed considerable importance. Progressing from a more limited notion of informed consent, shared decision making calls upon patients to voice the desires and preferences of their authentic self, engaging in choice among alternatives as a way to exercise deeply held values. One influential opinion in Jewish bioethics holds that Jewish law, in contradistinction to secular bioethics, limits the patient's exercise of autonomy only in those instances in which treatment choices are sensitive (...) to preferences. Here, we analyze a discussion in the Mishna, a foundational text of rabbinic Judaism, regarding patient autonomy in the setting of religiously mandated fasting, and commentaries in the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds, finding both a more expansive notion of such autonomy and a potential metaphysical grounding for it in the importance of patient self-knowledge. (shrink)

This paper focuses on the theme of natural rights, as it emerges from the works of Alasdair MacIntyre. In "After Virtue" he argues that «there are no such rights, and belief in them is one with belief in witches and in unicorns», but in later works he endorsed a thomistic view on natural law, which is compatible with the acknowledgment of universal human rights. MacIntyre’s writings contain the premises for an ontological foundation of natural rights, despite his rejection of any (...) formulation of them. (shrink)

Hans-Hermann Hoppe contends that the fact that a person has the capacity to argue entails that she has the moral right of exclusive control over her own body. Critics of Hoppe’s argument do not appear to have pinpointed its flaws. I expose the logical structure of Hoppe’s argument, distinguishing its pragmatic-contradiction and its mutual-recognition components. I provide three counterexamples to show that Hoppe’s mutual-recognition argument is invalid and I argue that the truth that appears to motivate the argument is simply (...) a banality. I show that Hoppe’s pragmatic-contradiction argument is invalid, has a false premise and fails to link up with his mutual-recognition argument in the way that he requires to reach his conclusion. I conclude by outlining three perils of pragmatic-contradiction arguments, the weakness of mutual-recognition arguments, and the implausibility of attempts to derive a universal moral status from a specialised activity such as argumentation. (shrink)